Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: drivers/w1/: why is dscore.c not ds9490r.c ? | From | Evgeniy Polyakov <> | Date | Mon, 22 Nov 2004 20:37:00 +0300 |
| |
On Mon, 2004-11-22 at 18:19 +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Mon, Nov 22, 2004 at 08:05:09PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: > > On Mon, 2004-11-22 at 17:51 +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > > On Mon, Nov 22, 2004 at 07:25:45PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: > > > > > > > > > How would a different w1 bus master chip look like in > > > > > drivers/w1/Makefile? > > > > > > > > obj-m: proprietary_module.o > > > > proprietary_module-objs: dscore.o proprietary_module_init.o > > > > > > > > Actually it will live outside the kernel tree, but will require ds2490 > > > > driver. > > > > It could be called ds2490.c but I think dscore is better name. > > > > > > Why are you talking about proprietary modules living outside the kernel > > > tree? > > > > > > The only interesting case is the one of modules shipped with the kernel. > > > And for them, this will break at link time if two such modules are > > > included statically into the kernel. > > > > If we _currently_ do not have any open hw/module that depends on ds2490 > > core then it does not > > mean that tomorrow noone will add it. > > Once again: > _this will break at link time if two such modules are included > statically into the kernel_ > > obj-$(CONFIG_W1_DS9490) += ds9490r.o > ds9490r-objs := dscore.o > > obj-$(CONFIG_W1_FOO) += foo.o > foo-objs := dscore.o >
that should be follwing:
Kconfig: foo depends on ds9490r
obj-$() += foo.o foo-objs := foo_1.o foo_2.o
It just happened that ds9490r does not need any other parts but dscore.o. That is why ds9490r.o have only dscore.o in it's dependency.
> This will break with CONFIG_W1_DS9490=y and CONFIG_W1_FOO=y. > > > That drivers/w1/ contains many EXPORT_SYMBOL's with no in-kernel users > is a different issue I might send a separate patch for (that besides > proprietary modules there might come some day open source drivers using > them is not a reason).
Why remove existing non disturbing set of exported functions? Are they violate some unknown issues?
> > cu > Adrian > -- [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |